• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "B'Liar likes tax evoidance"

Collapse

  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    no why would I? if I were a plumber I wouldn't.
    Then when tax avoidance was mentioned, why did you talk about your ISA when you know full well that wasn't the topic? Is your argument that as you stopped avoiding tax once the government made it too difficult, we shouldn't ask you about it?

    Seems your avoidance and Tony's is quite comparable.

    Are you no longer a contractor?

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post

    And pre-IR35 you simply took all your income as a salary?
    no why would I? if I were a plumber I wouldn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    You mean the incompetent way HMRC tried to apply IR35? My company was closed with HMRC approval so I'm innocent.
    And pre-IR35 you simply took all your income as a salary?

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    I think he's probably talking about Ltd company stuff rather than your ISA.
    You mean the incompetent way HMRC tried to apply IR35? My company was closed with HMRC approval so I'm innocent.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    Taking advantage of an ISA is hardly controversial.
    I think he's probably talking about Ltd company stuff rather than your ISA.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by Whorty View Post

    So as you only preach on here it's ok to minimise your tax payments, but it's ok to call out others (even if the others are morally bankrupt)?

    It's all a bit hypocritical.

    I'm all for limiting my tax legally, so have no issue with others doing the same. I mean, how many of us would ever volunteer to pay more tax than we need to?

    And for the record, I never voted for Blair and can't stand the guy so I'm not defending him as an individual any more than I would defend Reese-Mogg, but they are (I assume) following the tax law so this really is just about jealousy.
    Taking advantage of an ISA is hardly controversial. Owning property via a tax avoidance vehicle is, especially if you stood up on the hustings suggesting it was immoral.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post

    You post a lot of moralistic comments here though.
    what HMRC are fecking incompetent and shagging your mate's wife is a bad idea?

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by Whorty View Post
    so this really is just about jealousy.
    Not really. Blair went on record - possibly in the campaign race before he first became PM(?) - saying this exact scenario was morally repugnant and shouldn't be allowed.

    So while I agree with most of your comment and that jealously certainly plays a part, there is also a large element of people genuinely perceiving it as duplicitous and hypocritical. To publicly go on record criticising a specific avoidance mechanism and then use it, and say "I followed the law" in your defence is pretty embarrassing. Especially when you were PM for quite a few years and didn't do anything about it.

    It would be like someone here saying that taking earnings via dividends is morally reprehensible and then doing it anyway. Put your money where your mouth is if you want to be seen as having integrity.
    Last edited by d000hg; 7 October 2021, 10:13.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whorty
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    I have never taken to the national stage and proposed "fairness" in the tax system while taking Hector from behind with a huge avoidance scheme.
    So as you only preach on here it's ok to minimise your tax payments, but it's ok to call out others (even if the others are morally bankrupt)?

    It's all a bit hypocritical.

    I'm all for limiting my tax legally, so have no issue with others doing the same. I mean, how many of us would ever volunteer to pay more tax than we need to?

    And for the record, I never voted for Blair and can't stand the guy so I'm not defending him as an individual any more than I would defend Reese-Mogg, but they are (I assume) following the tax law so this really is just about jealousy.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by vetran View Post

    I have never taken to the national stage and proposed "fairness" in the tax system while taking Hector from behind with a huge avoidance scheme.
    You post a lot of moralistic comments here though.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    Originally posted by Whorty View Post
    There is a certain irony of contractors, who refuse to take inside IR35 roles, debating the morals of legal tax avoidance used by others. Contractors who presumably in the main manage their 'companies' to maximise their tax efficiency, including adding spouses to be shareholders etc.

    Glass houses guys and gals
    I have never taken to the national stage and proposed "fairness" in the tax system while taking Hector from behind with a huge avoidance scheme.

    Leave a comment:


  • Whorty
    replied
    There is a certain irony of contractors, who refuse to take inside IR35 roles, debating the morals of legal tax avoidance used by others. Contractors who presumably in the main manage their 'companies' to maximise their tax efficiency, including adding spouses to be shareholders etc.

    Glass houses guys and gals

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by WTFH View Post

    If he was a Tory MP or Tory MP's wife, he'd be working perfectly legally to safeguard his future. (Or whatever JRM etc use to deflect from their ways of not paying their fair share)
    He's working perfectly legally now (as far as we know). You can be entirely dodgy while remaining within the law, in fact that's rather the point of this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • WTFH
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post

    You know you're a dodgy tax avoider
    If he was a Tory MP or Tory MP's wife, he'd be working perfectly legally to safeguard his future. (Or whatever JRM etc use to deflect from their ways of not paying their fair share)

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post

    Nope, I was asking a poster to elaborate on their point which they have done.
    You know you're a dodgy tax avoider

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X